| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
   |
Posted - 2008.05.12 08:44:00 -
[61]
I'm posting in a thread with 2 guys managing to try and look cool by flaming the op, yet fails epicly at contributing to the thread 
|
Fink Angel
Caldari
The Merry Men
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:04:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Verone
Yes, since the last ice age when the majority of it was killed off in the extreme north and south, it's actually increased apparently.
Well, whatever happened before happened over tens of thousands of years and was dealt with naturally. the planet Earth is generally very good at sorting itself out. However we are accelerating the changes very rapidly.
We're talking about a hundred year scale now, if not tens of years. I have no doubt the Earth will be able to sort itself out again, but we may not be in the picture to see it.
If we don't try to start at least pushing things in the right direction, it may be too late for us ever to make ammends.
You don't think in a hundred years time, our ancestors will not look back on this period as a time of over consumption of natural resources?
Originally by: Verone
Eric Reed Boucher as he's more formally know is an imbicile who's own band members sued him, and who no one takes seriously.
He's not exactly the "political activist" you want to be quoting to get your point across.
I know his real name, and that there was a major fallout with East Bay Ray (over royalties I believe) but that's not relevant to this discussion. He's hardly an imbecile, and I for one have got a lot of time for his thoughts and have listened to most of his spoken word stuff. I might not agree with all of it, but I'm more than happy to quote him if it helps to make my point.
|
annoing
Amarr
MisFunk Inc.
Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:13:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Verone
....burning down acre upon acre of forest to graze cattle and build villages, towns then cities.
Right up to present day we've been dumping massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. Literally millions of square miles of rainforest and scrubland have no problem with recycling this into the air we breathe.
*Unfortunately we have reached the point where deforestation has reached critical proportions for the balance to be maintained. There is also a hypothosis that well established forests and plants have reached saturation point in their ability to take in carbon particles and they can take no more. When they are burnt they release all their stored carbon particles back into the atmosphere. Also, when a well established area like the Amazon Basin or Southest Asia are destroyed it results in a collapse in biodiversity contributing to the Holecene Mass Extinction theory. This has far more reaching consequences that you can imagine.
Something for you to think about: consider the plight of the humble Bee. There are fears that with the world-wide population being devasted by disease, what will pollinate the crops over the coming years leading to possible massive food shortages. In the USA most of the agricultural regions rely solely on bees for pollination.
Originally by: Wikipedia
It is estimated that one third of the human food supply depends on insect pollination, most of which is accomplished by bees, especially the domesticated Western honey bee. Contract pollination has overtaken the role of honey production for beekeepers in many countries. Monoculture and pollinator decline (of many bee species) have increasingly caused honey bee keepers to become migratory so that bees can be concentrated in seasonally-varying high-demand areas of pollination. Recently, many such migratory beekeepers have experienced substantial losses, prompting the announcement of investigation into the phenomenon, dubbed "Colony Collapse Disorder," amidst great concern over the nature and extent of the losses
Dwi Cymraig
|
Michayel Lyon
Hematite Rose
Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:16:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Khan d'barr
Oh and before anyone starts telling me about Al Gore's paper, it was discredited by thousands of scientists, so I'm siding with the majority.
What thousands of scientists?
"With the July 2007 release of the revised statement by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, no remaining scientific body of national or international standing is known to reject the basic findings of human influence on recent climate."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
---
Lasiverin Dark > Is everyone here allied?
Red Knight > we are allied by our zombie like ability to ***** missions
GM Xamother: "Beeing online is not considered harassment or exploit." |
Trind2222
Amarr
Soliders Of Eve
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:33:00 -
[65]
where I live we use to get 1 meter whit snow or more every year the last 3 years we got like 20-30 cm snow and the winter have bean sorter for every year.
So yes I think global warming is a problem.
|
Ixianus
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 09:36:00 -
[66]
Anything.... ANYTHING, produced by the Discovery Institute is not credible.
If the religious/stupid affiliation of an organization doesn't effect its credibility then how about we open up an investigation of the Holocaust, clearly Iran has some problems with it, which of course isn't discredited due to Iran being totally balls to the wall insane.
End of line.
|
annoing
Amarr
MisFunk Inc.
Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:06:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Ixianus
Anything.... ANYTHING, produced by the Discovery Institute is not credible.
If the religious/stupid affiliation of an organization doesn't effect its credibility then how about we open up an investigation of the Holocaust, clearly Iran has some problems with it, which of course isn't discredited due to Iran being totally balls to the wall insane.
End of line.
^^^ you won this thread... ty for this, seriously, I really mean it ^^^
Dwi Cymraig
|
7shining7one7
Quafe Paladins
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:36:00 -
[68]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/05/2008 10:45:35
Let's steer the conversation back on track again before we drive straight into a ditch.
Forget that discovery institute then and go to the source of the information they have caught up on, originally made in a 10 year study which they fought to get published because the "accepted academic community" only wanted to hear of global warming theories, but failed to be able to refute the study.. human comedy in action. The study, not based on speculations but on real hands down hardcore research, tests and documentation proving that clouds are the regulators of our entire climate on earth and that the sun controls the amount of clouds along with cosmic rays. and that there was 10 times as much co2 in our atmosphere at the last ice age than we have now. and that the cycle we are in is perfectly normal and determined by our solar system moving on a spiral arm of the galaxy.. yeah what an incredible concept, the universe actually effects you.. u know like the moon affecting the tide and all that mumbojumbo ...
that should shut up al gore pretty well, if he would ever choose to listen that is (too busy making money off doomsday prophecies and all that don't you know.)
it's also interesting to think about how exactly did we get that high levels of co2 in our atmosphere in the past when there apparently were no civilization in existence at that time..
oh wait..
the sphinx has unquestionable and unmistakeable (everybody knows and can't refute, but nobody seems to really want to talk about it) signs of _water_ errosion on it and the pyramids don't.
|
Akiba Penrose
Minmatar
PAK
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 10:41:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 12/05/2008 10:41:29
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Isiskhan
Originally by: LaVista Vista
So.. what is your point?
As far as I can see, Al Gore doesn't exactly use science either. In fact, neither does he use reason.
On the other hand, these people makes more use of what is more science-ish.
Just because you are biased, it doesn't mean everything you say, is wrong.
I watched Al Gore's documentary and I didn't quite like it, it relied far too much on trying to appeal to the watcher's emotions. But the point is not Al Gore, he's not a scientist, just a politician, so pretty much irrelevant to the discussion.
Climate change is about science, so you should listen to what the vast majority of climate scientists are saying about it. Not some organization that has made it their stated goal to override science and the teaching of it whenever they fancy it contradicts the word of their God. Or their lone professor guy with a chemistry background.
So where are these climate scientists? I'm yet to hear what they have to say.
http://www.ipcc.ch/
|
goodby4u
Logistic Technologies Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 14:40:00 -
[70]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/05/2008 10:51:41
Let's steer the conversation back on track again before we drive straight into a ditch.
Forget that discovery institute then and go to the source of the information they have caught up on, originally made in a 10 year study which they fought to get published because the "accepted academic community" only wanted to hear of global warming theories, but failed to be able to refute the study.. human comedy in action. The study, not based on speculations but on real hands down hardcore research, tests and documentation proving that clouds are the regulators of our entire climate on earth and that the sun controls the amount of clouds along with cosmic rays. and that there was 10 times as much co2 in our atmosphere at the last ice age than we have now. and that the cycle we are in is perfectly normal and determined by our solar system moving on a spiral arm of the galaxy.. yeah what an incredible concept, the universe actually effects you.. u know like the moon affecting the tide and all that mumbojumbo ...
that should shut up al gore pretty well, if he would ever choose to listen that is (too busy making money off of doomsday prophecies and all that don't you know.)
it's also interesting to think about how exactly did we get that high levels of co2 in our atmosphere in the past when there apparently were no civilization in existence at that time..
oh wait..
the sphinx has unquestionable and unmistakeable (everybody knows and can't refute, but nobody seems to really want to talk about it) signs of _water_ errosion on it and the pyramids don't.
Awesome, and it actually seems pretty solid.
|
Isiskhan
Gnostic Misanthropy
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 14:56:00 -
[71]
Here's a comprehensive survey of the scientific opinion on climate change, "as given by synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists".
TL;DR: These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the IPCC position that "An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.
|
Kusha'an
Gallente
Equinox Industrial Co.
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 16:30:00 -
[72]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/05/2008 10:51:41
Let's steer the conversation back on track again before we drive straight into a ditch.
Forget that discovery institute then and go to the source of the information they have caught up on, originally made in a 10 year study which they fought to get published because the "accepted academic community" only wanted to hear of global warming theories, but failed to be able to refute the study.. human comedy in action. The study, not based on speculations but on real hands down hardcore research, tests and documentation proving that clouds are the regulators of our entire climate on earth and that the sun controls the amount of clouds along with cosmic rays. and that there was 10 times as much co2 in our atmosphere at the last ice age than we have now. and that the cycle we are in is perfectly normal and determined by our solar system moving on a spiral arm of the galaxy.. yeah what an incredible concept, the universe actually effects you.. u know like the moon affecting the tide and all that mumbojumbo ...
that should shut up al gore pretty well, if he would ever choose to listen that is (too busy making money off of doomsday prophecies and all that don't you know.)
it's also interesting to think about how exactly did we get that high levels of co2 in our atmosphere in the past when there apparently were no civilization in existence at that time..
oh wait..
the sphinx has unquestionable and unmistakeable (everybody knows and can't refute, but nobody seems to really want to talk about it) signs of _water_ errosion on it and the pyramids don't.
THIS.
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
Arvald
Caldari
The School 0f Fine Arts
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 17:02:00 -
[73]
i say we glass the planet and start from scratch
Quote:
Shooting the hostage does usually remove a critical bargaining chip of the hostage takers
I don't think it mattered at that point, we were already bargaining with missile launchers |
Akiba Penrose
Minmatar
PAK
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 17:17:00 -
[74]
Originally by: 7shining7one7
The study, not based on speculations but on real hands down hardcore research, tests and documentation proving that clouds are the regulators of our entire climate on earth and that the sun controls the amount of clouds along with cosmic rays.
I watched the video and there is no proof what so ever in it,, it is presenting a theory about how clouds might be created. If he is right it will probably have a large impact on the climate discussion tho.
Here is a something from wikipedia for you:
Originally by: Wikipedia
In April 2008, Professor Terry Sloan of Lancaster University published a paper in the journal Environmental Research Letters titled "Testing the proposed causal link between cosmic rays and cloud cover"[8], which found no significant link between cloud cover and cosmic ray intensity in the last 20 years. Svensmark responded by saying "Terry Sloan has simply failed to understand how cosmic rays work on clouds".[9]
However, Dr. Giles Harrison of Reading University, who has worked on the issue, has described the work as important "as it provides an upper limit on the cosmic ray-cloud effect in global satellite cloud data". Harrison's research[10], which studied the UK only, has suggested that cosmic rays make only a very weak contribution to cloud formation.
As you can see, nothing is proven and the theory is still being tested.
|
Captain Bringdown
Minmatar
Rage Against the Answering Machine
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 18:16:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Captain Bringdown on 12/05/2008 18:16:35
I love how ppl still quote wikipedia for credible facts and theories... "whats that? my theory is incorrect?! *makes wiki article* there we go, all safe and sound again"
|
Akiba Penrose
Minmatar
PAK
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 18:54:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Captain Bringdown
Edited by: Captain Bringdown on 12/05/2008 18:16:35
I love how ppl still quote wikipedia for credible facts and theories... "whats that? my theory is incorrect?! *makes wiki article* there we go, all safe and sound again"
Im not sure i understand,,
Are you saying that I made the wikipedia article?
|
goodby4u
Logistic Technologies Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 19:15:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Akiba Penrose
Originally by: Captain Bringdown
Edited by: Captain Bringdown on 12/05/2008 18:16:35
I love how ppl still quote wikipedia for credible facts and theories... "whats that? my theory is incorrect?! *makes wiki article* there we go, all safe and sound again"
Im not sure i understand,,
Are you saying that I made the wikipedia article?
No hes not, but remember who surf on the internet, what usually happens is some guy gets on wiki with an agenda and fills every part of it in with"facts".
Or he just says its all because of the vikings, which is a solid theory indeed.
|
Digital Anarchist
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 19:51:00 -
[78]
Even if the most catastrophic predictions would come true, is a bureaucratic-regulartory apparatus really the answer?
Socialism has been tried before at a large scale and it never seems to work out. And no, carbon trade is not "capitalism".
With trillions of dollars on the table, most hope of rational discussion breaks down. As the new green™ industry speaks, it's stuffing its pockets with the loot, while government and hapless greens are goading them along.
But that said, there are plenty of monsters left to parade if nothing happens. Or indeed, global cooling may be a more catastrophic scenario to entertain (hence, more profitable).
------------------------
This space for rent |
7shining7one7
Quafe Paladins
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 20:49:00 -
[79]
akiba, the video is general information about the study, not the study itself, not the tests and so forth, that's for scientific articles and the likes.
also the initial study was first proposed published in 1996 but nobody seemed interested in publishing it.
it has now been 12 years since then and svensmark and the rest haven't been sitting on their butt doing nothing. the study and the research and test and so forth are there and becoming further refined also.
furthermore you should read between the lines and see that the opposition represents the "academic community" who don't want their co2 global warming idea shot down, it's big money don't you know just look at al gore, he got a pulitzer. there ain't too much money in coming out and saying that everything is pretty much normal, ppl and corporations tend to not want to pay that much money for that.
and we definately ought to be more environmentally aware, but that it's not like the entire planet will crash and burn because of our pollution. it should however come to a dramatic stop due to the damage we are doing to the animal and plant life, as for the sphere itself, it can take a huge beating before it cleans itself up without taking prisoners and out of pure necessity.
now as for the earthquakes like the recent one in china, well that's more due to ******s messing about with technology and advanced knowledge they can't handle wisely, albeit highly primitive knowledge, such as scalar weapons which can cause chain reactions in the systems within the sphere, such as earthquakes and tsunamis and the likes.
but offcourse knowing al gore et al they'd probably like to blame co2 and global worming for that too. getting even more money for researching means to stop pollution.. and so on.
|
Frug
Repo Industries
R.E.P.O.
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 21:10:00 -
[80]
... There are still people who think climate change/global warming isn't happening?
Wow. The human species never fails to amaze.
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - -
If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO
BOOO!! - Ductoris
Neat look what I found - Kreul
Hey, my marbles |
7shining7one7
Quafe Paladins
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 21:12:00 -
[81]
Edited by: 7shining7one7 on 12/05/2008 21:12:18
Originally by: Frug
... There are still people who think climate change/global warming isn't happening?
Wow. The human species never fails to amaze.
climate change happening?: yeah.
because of co2 based pollution?: no.
|
Akiba Penrose
Minmatar
PAK
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 21:33:00 -
[82]
Edited by: Akiba Penrose on 12/05/2008 21:34:24
Originally by: 7shining7one7
akiba, the video is general information about the study, not the study itself, not the tests and so forth, that's for scientific articles and the likes.
yes, i understand.
What i was commenting on was the way you presented this video:
"The study, not based on speculations but on real hands down hardcore research, tests and documentation proving that clouds are the regulators of our entire climate on earth and that the sun controls the amount of clouds along with cosmic rays."
which is not the case..
PS
I know the work of Svensmark and Christensen from when i was a student (2000). The turmoil they created when they presented their theories was quite amusing. Other scientist was actually yelling at them during and after their presentations.
|
nahtoh
Caldari
Bull Industries
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 21:44:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Havok Dryke
Normally I would troll this thread for all it's worth, but the OP is doing a remarkably good job of it so far.
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Khan d'barr
Being pro-creationist is not anti-science.
We need a "rolling on the floor clawing my eyes out at the sheer stupidity of this statement" emoteicon
Quote:
evolution which [...] can't be proved 100% with science
So, you mean, "99.9% of the data corroborates with the theory so far, and we still have the other 0.1% of the data missing and therefore unchecked" is not scientifical enough for you ?
As opposed to, say, "we have absolutely no evidence for this, but that's what some book written a couple of thousand years ago said, so it must be true" ?
I'll just add my props to this reply and go elsewhere. Creationism is not science. It is fundamentalist Christianity wearing a "Science" nametag. And yes, credibility does matter when evaluating the accuracy of a statement issued by a "scientific" organization. You wouldn't give little bobby saying that the moon is made of cheese any credibility would you?
Anybody who quotes Al "i invented the internet, I served a endangered specise as food and my power bill is higher than minimum wage and fly in a privte jet to to tell people not fly it hurts the enviroment" Gore is just as spaced out...
Sorry but you can't use they just appeal to emotions there fore can't do any science at all to someone who basicly does the same over a different issue...
=========
"I am not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why can`t we just take the safety labels off everything and let the problem fix its self |
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 21:45:00 -
[84]
Oh god. Climate Change AND Evolution. All we need now is some America-bashing to round off the unholy trinity, and the very fabrics of the forum can be torn asunder by a rift of pure ****-storm.
------
Originally by: Dark Shikari
The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways. |
ReaperOfSly
Gallente
Lyrus Associates
|
Posted - 2008.05.12 22:11:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Patch86
Oh god. Climate Change AND Evolution. All we need now is some America-bashing to round off the unholy trinity, and the very fabrics of the forum can be torn asunder by a rift of pure ****-storm.
All Americans are fat stupid cheese-burger-inhaling ex-colonials who can't spell "colour" correctly. 
BEHOLD, THE UNHOLY TRINITY IS COMPLETE! 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
|
IonHammer
Minmatar
Black Avatar
Lost Sheep Domain
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 02:06:00 -
[86]
Quote:
I'm sorry but if you watch the presentation, you would see that not once is religion mentioned/involved. Being pro-creationist is not anti-science. It's against evolution which is a) a different matter entirely and b) evolution can't be proved 100% with science.
last time i looked supporting religious dogma and doctrine was pretty much anti science.
Further, since it would be bias to single out those people supporting religious dogma and doctrine only I would point out that this is a fundamental failing of many organisational structures not only religious ones.
So what evidence would it take for u to disregard creation dogma. The same that u used to disregard evolution?
If thats your real life i'm very jealous - Petwraith |
Kusha'an
Gallente
Equinox Industrial Co.
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 03:18:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Frug
... There are still people who think climate change/global warming isn't happening?
Wow. The human species never fails to amaze.
You really should bone up on your current events.
----
What part of "shorn't" do you not understand? |
Omni Dryke
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 03:55:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Arvald
i say we glass the planet and start from scratch
Hear hear!
10 bucks says it still wont kill the c ockroaches in my basement.
|
Arron S
Gallente
Rampage Eternal
Ka-Tet
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 04:24:00 -
[89]
I stoped giving a **** about Global warming when the alarmists started calling the shots.
|
Trind2222
Amarr
Soliders Of Eve
|
Posted - 2008.05.13 07:31:00 -
[90]
A man made a expedition to prove ocean was in danger it was Thor Heyerdah http://www.kon-tiki.no/Heyerdahl/. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thor_Heyerdahl
many did not believe that he who'd find any proof but he did allot of things have changed because of the proof he did find like
removal of phosphor in washing powder less toxic waste in to ocean.
If he not fund those proof the ocean food have not been safe to eat to day.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |